New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-04-21
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE.

AN ACT WHICH NOBODY CAN INTERPREr-AiS
DOUBTFUL CONsTITUTIONALITY.
THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT An Analysis Nays mn 1
Its provisions. BY joins X. Dos PAssoS A~wo' w.
125. q. r. Putnam's Sons
The author has undertaken difficult. not 10 say
q surprising, task. Most lawyers IN INC oou""J
have reached the conclusion that the Interstate act
is one which they are not able to interpret ~
Dos Passos apparently arrives Mt the same cohc'u-
sion himself but endeavors to point out the nature
and scope of the act, and to dehnc the questions
which have to be settled in regard to It, 1t can
hardly be said that his work has been done Win
absolute accuracy but for most persons 1T will
proye an important aid to an understanding of the
law The writer first reviews the history OF egls-
lation on this subject, showing that attempts by
tie States to regulate railway transportation had
at first been sustained by the On'ted
States Supreme Court. as respects trans
pOrtation entirely within the Ilmits Oh
State 1.-THE warehouse decision. 1870, put weIc
afterward met by the decision Waoash case
1850 that the State had no power 10 Regulate
transportation even within the limits Oh a otate' IL
such transportation was part OF movement
through the State or from one State into another
1t is shown that the question, which to many mas
seemed doubtful, whether the phrase to regulate
commerce." which was originally applied only to
measures of taxatloA, embraced the power to con-
troll the instruments Of commerce, such as the
means of transportation, was apparently settled py
the courts in the decisions above mentioned.
The criticisms OF Mr.. Dos Passos point out effect
lively the strange and questionable features OF the
act. 1t is shown that, while in one section rates
are required to be reasonable and just 1t is pro-
vded in another section that, whether reasonable
and Just or not they shall not be greater for
shorter than for longer distance under ike cr-
cumstancesL The question is raised whether the
fufio wi
regulation of commerce within the meaning OF the
Constitution page 15), and afterward whether
Congress possessed the power to delegate to
q commission authority to set aside provis-
ions making it offence to charge greater rates for
the shorter than for the longer distance One other
objection he does not urge as he might; II ever
statute should be held void for vagueness parts of
the Interstate law should be on that ground held
invalid. Mr.. Dos Passos infers page 32) that the
fourth section by its last clause expressly prohibits
the transporter from charging as great compeDsa-
ton for shorter as for longer distance. But |
this construction was emphatically repudiated by
Senator Cuom in a speech which Mr.. Dos Passes |
quotes Cpage 80, and it will be generally agreed |
that the language of the act does not bear other
construction than that which the Senator has given
It, namely that the prohibition of greater charge
should not be cited as a warrant for as great |
charge in any case where. but for that provision,
the latter would have been held unreasonable or |
unjust.
Mr. Dos Passos shows that the act in question vir-
tually abrogates important features of many rail-
road charters and great number Of private con- |
tracts and raises the question whether IT can in this
respect be held constitutional. lie shows that, con-
trary to precedent, Congress has made certain |
acts penal except when permitted by |
commission that it has greatly enlarged the |
powers of Circuit Courts. authorizing them to take
jurisdiction in cases where the defendants have no
domcie or business within the jurisdiction of such
courts; that it effects another remarkable change
in the laws by permitting action upon complaints |
where the persons complaining have no interest in |
the question pending; and that it is most unfair and
oncsided in providing that an allowance for cOun-
sci fees shall be made tor the benefit of the COM
painant to any amount in the discretion of court,
but makes no provision for any allowance whatever
in favor of companies against which q complaint Is
made. however groundess unreason able the suit.
One other criticism of importance. that the |
act contains no limitation to the time within |
which proceedings may be begun on account
of any act in violation of its provisions Years
may elapsc and the matters in question may have
been entirely forgotten by the parties interested,
and yet complaints may be made, and suits may be
begun. though the destruction of records and |
the death of witnesses may make it impossible 10
establish the facts in defence. The conclusion
which reaches, after reading what MI. Dos
Passos has said on this extraordinary act, is that
law making bodies in this world have rarely enacted
difficult of construction in terfering
greatly with established rules, customs, and meth
DDS of commerce, and with so little attempt to COM
prehcnd the nature of the changes contemplated.
-